Presidentofctai

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Jaerock Lee, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. cab (call) 05:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Jaerock Lee. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. cab (call) 07:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jaerock Lee, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. cab (call) 01:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Stop trying to delete material by claiming it is not in the source cited. If you could be bothered to search, you would very clearly find this phrase appears in the article: [1]. But of course you can't be bothered to search because your only goal here is to delete all the negative information you can and replace it with glowing hagiography. cab (call) 04:37, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Your addition to Jaerock Lee has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. cab (call) 05:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Warning on multiple accounts

Please be aware that editors are generally restricted to one account. Using multiple accounts is unacceptable and can result in editors being blocked from editing. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Jaerock Lee, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your repeated attempts to delete sources and sourced content you don't like, using your account or sockpuppet accounts, violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Your editing has crossed the line into abusive vandalism and the next time you delete sources or sourced content from the article you will be blocked. cab (call) 05:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Please do not continue in the same way when your block has expired, or you may be blocked indefinitely. It is clear that you have a strong conflict of interest, and one of your principal purposes in editing Wikipedia is to suppress information you don't like. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Understanding the Message of the Cross of Jesus Christ for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Understanding the Message of the Cross of Jesus Christ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Understanding the Message of the Cross of Jesus Christ until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 04:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

S. Korean evangelist's Uganda visit prompts cult jitters

This kind of edit is precisely what got you blocked last time: deletion of a source, falsely marked as a "minor edit", simply because you don't like its content or title. Do you have any response or justification for your actions? Please respond here or at Talk:Jaerock Lee. cab (call) 04:36, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. dalahäst ^(talk) 05:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network), a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 05:38, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network). If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 05:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did at WCDN (World Christian Doctors Network), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 06:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

This is your last warning; the next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EPANews for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)